On 01.05.2012 15:30, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 9:57 PM, Georg Brandl <g.bra...@gmx.net> wrote: >> With 3.3a3 tagged and the beta stage currently 2 months away, I would like >> to draw your attention to the following list of possible features for 3.3 >> as specified by PEP 398: > > A few of those are on my plate, soo... > >> * PEP 395: Qualified Names for Modules > > I'm currently thinking I'll defer this to 3.4. With the importlib > change and PEP 420, there's already going to be an awful lot of churn > in that space for 3.3, plus I have other things that I consider more > important that I want to get done first.
OK, I've moved this one to the "deferred" section for now. >> * PEP 405: Python Virtual Environments > > I pinged Carl and Vinay about the remaining open issues yesterday, and > indicated I'd really like to have something I can pronounce on soon so > we can get it into the fourth alpha on May 26. I'm hoping we'll see > the next draft of the PEP soon, but the ball is back in their court > for the moment. Yes, there also was an RFC on the distutils-sig. >> * PEP 3144: IP Address manipulation library > > This is pretty close to approval. Peter's addressed all the > substantive comments that were made regarding the draft API, and he's > going to provide an update to the PEP shortly that should get it into > a state where I can mark it as Approved. Integration of the library > and tests shouldn't be too hard, but it would really help if a sphinx > expert could take a look at my Stack Overflow question [1] about > generating an initial version of the API reference docs. (I've been > meaning to figure out the right mailing list to send sphinx questions > to, but haven't got around to it yet). > > [1] > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10377576/emit-restructuredtext-from-sphinx-autodoc I can create that initial .rst for you. It is quite trivial, but not supported by Sphinx without hacking the autodoc code a little. >> * Breaking out standard library and docs in separate repos? > > Our current development infrastructure simply isn't set up to cope > with this. With both 407 and 413 still open (and not likely to go > anywhere any time soon), this simply isn't going to happen for 3.3. Agreed, and moved to deferred. >> Benjamin: I'd also like to know what will become of PEP 415. > > I emailed Guido and Benjamin about that one the other day. I'll be PEP > czar, and the most likely outcome is that I'll approve the PEP as is > and we'll create a separate tracker issue to discuss the exact > behaviour of the traceback display functions when they're handed > exceptions with __suppress_context__ set to False and __cause__ and > __context__ are both non-None (Benjamin's patch preserves the status > quo of only displaying __cause__ in that case, which I don't think is > ideal, but also don't think is worth holding up PEP 415 over). I'm > still waiting to hear back from Benjamin though. I've added 420 to the pending list in any case. Georg _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com